• Share
  • Email
  • Embed
  • Like
  • Save
  • Private Content
managerTraining.ppt
 

managerTraining.ppt

on

  • 706 views

 

Statistics

Views

Total Views
706
Views on SlideShare
706
Embed Views
0

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
25
Comments
0

0 Embeds 0

No embeds

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

    managerTraining.ppt managerTraining.ppt Presentation Transcript

    • Performance Appraisals Managers & Supervisors
    • Overview
      • Goals of our program
      • New on-line form
        • Ratings
      • Evaluation Life Cycle
      • S.M.A.R.T. Expectations
      • Process
        • Preparing for the appraisal
        • Writing the appraisal
        • Delivering the appraisal
      • Time line for 2007
    • Goals of our Performance Appraisal Program
      • Accountability
      • Consistency
      • Simplicity
      Employee accountable for completing self-assessment; supervisor accountable for rating actual performance against metrics he/she sets Uniform process and application of ratings with same core expectations for all employees Form and instructions are easy to understand. Form was developed based on feedback from 2 employee groups
    • “ You Talked, We Listened” Feedback from Employee and Management Groups about Current Performance Review Process
      • Concerns with Current Process
        • No supervisor accountability to deliver reviews to employees; need consistent standards at all levels of management to deliver reviews in a timely manner
        • No interaction between employee & supervisor from time review is initially delivered and when it’s time to sit down and review the year’s performance.
        • Requires too much writing for both employees and supervisors
          • People are writing books to self justify rating
        • Too much time elapses from start to finish
        • Too many ratings; need to simplify
        • Supervisors need to provide useful feedback; not just respond to long narratives employees submit
        • Documentation needs to be fair and balanced; acknowledging efforts, successes, and short-comings
        • Not enough communication about the process from management to employees; breeds rumors
        • Supervisors need to use performance review (with realistic feedback & suggestions) as a tool to educate employees on how they can improve
      • What is Not Working
        • Self Assessment
          • Managers have already submitted ratings before reviewing the employee self assessment
        • Timely delivery of goals and objectives
          • Not happening
        • Organization’s objectives not flowing down from divisions and departments
      • Matrixed employees
        • Do not receive all feedback that should be considered in the overall evaluation
    • What’s Changed
      • Number of ratings
      • Ratings definitions
      • Lab-wide Core Expectations (5) – same for all staff
      • Weighting
        • Core expectations account for1/3
        • Job Knowledge/Technical Expectations individually weighted, totaling 2/3 of score
      • Maximum number of Job Knowledge/Technical Expectations = 7 for FY08
      • There are two meetings between the employee and supervisor instead of one.
      • Matrixed employees and those who provide service to another group 25% or more of the review period: feedback will be captured and included in the review online
      • Process is now automated and online
      • Performance Review cycle is Oct 1st – Sept 30th
      • Promotion process
      • Peer Review Process – replaced with Calibration Review by divisional top management
    • New Appraisal Form
      • Identification section
      • Rating definitions
      • Core expectations
        • A set of common behaviors against which all employees are measured
      • Scoring
      Page 1
    • New Appraisal Form
      • Job Knowledge/Technical Expectations
        • - From 2006 Performance Expectations
      • Scoring
      • Overall Rating
      Page 2
    • New Appraisal Form
      • Employee comments
      • Supervisor comments
      • Future expectations
      • Suggested development
      • Signatures/Review
      Page 3
    • Performance Ratings
      • 5 = Exceeded All Job Expectations - Performance exceeded the goals and standards established for the position. Demonstrated performance is so exceptional that any knowledgeable observer would recognize the overall high quality of the results achieved by the employee
      • 4 = Exceeded Most Job Expectations - Performance exceeded most goals and standards and successfully achieved all other job requirements that contribute to the success of the Lab
      • 3 = Achieved Job Expectations - Performance consistently met and may have exceeded some of the goals established for the position. This rating reflects solid and reliable performance; characteristics of a fully qualified, experienced employee who is contributing to the success of the Lab
      • 2 = Marginally Met Job Expectations - Performance met some job goals, but many requirements of the position were not successfully achieved. Further effort, training, and/or counseling are needed before a higher level can be achieved
      • 1 = Did Not Meet Job Expectations - Performance failed to meet the goals and standards for the position. Employee requires frequent guidance in completing routine tasks. Immediate and specific development is necessary to bring the employee to a satisfactory performance level.
      Any area with a rating of ‘Marginally Met Job Expectations’ or’ Did Not Meet Job Expectations’ must receive a mid year review. An overall rating of ‘Marginally Met Job Expectations’ or ‘Did Not Meet Job Expectations’ will have a Performance Improvement Plan completed and turned in with the performance appraisal.
    • Weighting of Categories
      • Overall rating consist of
        • Core Expectations comprise of score
          • Essential for overall performance success
            • Any job
            • Any group
        • Job Knowledge/Technical Expectations contribute to score
          • Employee’s unique contribution to the Lab’s success
            • His/her specific job
            • The dept or group
            • Tied to overall Lab or division goals for FY 08
      1/3 2/3
    • Glossary of “Status” Terms
      • Inactive: Supervisor needs to enter the employee’s 2006-2007 performance expectations. If a supervisor has an employee who has been matrixed or providing service to another group for 25% or more of the review period, he/she should notify the supervisors to provide feedback by clicking on the ‘Matrixed/Serviced Supervisor’ button. Please coordinate with your supervisor to start the review process.
      • Active: Supervisor has entered the employee’s performance expectations and the employee can begin the self assessment. Employees can press the SAVE button on the link and return at a later time to complete the assessment or make changes. However, once the SUBMIT button is pressed; no further changes can be made. All changes are final as of August 15, 07.
      • Employee Completion: Employee has completed the self assessment. The supervisor should complete the following activities:
      • Writing/Finalizing the review
      • Scheduling a meeting with the employee to discuss performance and FY ‘08 expectations
      • *Note* The supervisor can begin working on the employee’s review at any time.
      • Next Level Supervisor: The supervisor has met with the employee and finalized the performance review based on feedback and discussion. The review has been sent to the next level supervisor for review and concurrence of the proposed rating. If in agreement, next level supervisor electronically signs and submits to HR. If there is no concurrence or additional documentation is needed to support the rating, the review can be returned to the supervisor.
      • Calibration Meeting: Meeting occurs with the Division Head and his/her direct reports only. This meeting will calibrate ratings among the division and review any proposed ratings that are in the extreme categories (1 or 5). Any changes will be communicated back to the supervisor so that adjustments can be made and the supervisor can meet with the employee.
      • HR Receipt: Next level supervisor has electronically signed off on the evaluation and it has been submitted to HR for review.
      • Employee-Supervisor Meeting: The employee and supervisor meet to revisit the final performance review document, FY ‘08 expectations and the rating. Supervisor and employee electronically sign the document and it is submitted to HR.
    • Activating the Appraisal
      • Activate your direct reports’ appraisals
        • Open a web browser and go to http://www.jlab.org/div_dept/admin/HR/index.html
        • Click on link to the online performance appraisal
      Click Activate next to employee’s name Note that the top section of form shows your own status
    • This brings up the section of the employee’s appraisal form where the job expectations for the past year are to be listed. Enter the 06-07 expectations (listed, by typing or cutting/pasting from last year’s appraisal) and weight them relative to each other. Make cyber security an integrated part of application development and architecture. Take seriously the inherent risk of MIS application, and take measures to protect the integrity and security of MIS data and processes 2006-7
    • To accommodate the 06-07 review period, the form allows up to 10 job expectations to be listed; though for FY08 and beyond, the maximum will be 7 If the employee has spent more than 25% of his time working for others, alert those supervisors to complete a Work For Others Performance Summary Form You can now submit the expectations which will activate the employee’s form Click on Continue Once you click Submit, you may no longer modify these fields
    • Once the supervisor has activated the form, the employee will be notified via email to complete assessment. The supervisor will be alerted to begin next phase once employee completes assessment. Employee Notification
    • Writing the Appraisal The word Employee Completion shows the self-assessment is done Click on it to begin writing your appraisal Employee Completion
    • First, enter ratings for the Core Expectations
    • Then enter ratings for job knowledge/technical expectations. Summarize employee performance for review period in support of numerical ratings
    • Now enter FY 08 expectations as well as the weight distribution FY 08 Job Knowledge/Technical Expectations
    • Add any general comments and suggestions for professional development Submit the form for next level review. * Note* You can press the save button and return later to complete or make changes. However, once the “saved and forward” button is pressed no further changes can be made.
    • Next Steps in the Process
      • Inactive
      • Active
      • Employee Completion
      • Supervisor Draft
      • Next Level Supervisor Review
      • Calibration Meeting
      • HR Receipt
      • Employee Supervisor Meeting
    • Writing the Appraisal
      • Evaluate each expectation separately
        • Compare your assessment to employee’s
          • Focus on differences
          • Use specific examples to support your decisions
        • Write your comments
      • Score expectations; determine ratings
        • Compare rating definitions to
          • Your assessment
          • Make necessary adjustments so comments match ratings
      • Review new expectations
        • Do they naturally flow from your evaluation of employee’s performance?
        • Identify what professional development might help employee meet new expectations
    • Rating Pitfalls
      • Leniency: When supervisors see everything as good. This gives the employee an inflated picture of his/her performance.
      • Severity: When supervisors see everything as bad. Under-rated evaluations can lead to demoralization and turn-over.
      • Halo/Horns Effect: When an employee is rated either positively or negatively on one factor and that factor then influences the ratings for all other factors, the halo (positive) or horns (negative) effect is being exhibited. This is also when an overall global impression of the employee influences individual ratings.
      • Similarity: This occurs when supervisors give special consideration to those who have qualities that they perceive in themselves.
      • Recency/Primacy Bias: The recency effect occurs when recent events color or overshadow what occurred previously. Primacy occurs when events that happen first color or overshadow what comes after. First impressions are very powerful.
      • Unfair Comparisons: This occurs when employees are being evaluated against one another rather than against objective criteria.
      • Central Tendency: Evaluators who display central tendency tend to ignore or suppress differences. This tendency produces ratings that do not distinguish between employees.
    • Evaluation Life Cycle Informal Feedback Expectation Adjustment 6-mos assessment w/ Formal Feedback 12-mos appraisal w/ formal feedback & new expectations 12-mos appraisal w/ formal feedback & new expectations 6-mos assessment w/ Formal Feedback *
    • S.M.A.R.T. Expectations
      • S pecific – Expectations should specify what is to be achieved
      • M easurable – Both employee & supervisor should be able to determine whether the expectations are being met; contains quantitative or descriptive definitions of quantity/quality
      • A chievable - Are the expectations attainable for the person to whom they are assigned and with the resources available? Are they within the employee’s control or ability to influence?
      • R elevant – Do the expectations support a higher level organizational goal and the Lab’s mission? Do they measure actual products/outputs (not activities/processes)?
      • T imely – How much time should it take to achieve the expectations? What is the target date?
    • Template for Expectations Expectation Standard (expectation) Enter expectation State what must be done to reach it (action verb) State how it will be reached (including how you know when it is reached) State why it must be done this way or why the expectation is important (optional) Set time period or deadline (break up if it exceeds reporting period) Complete standard: When: Why: How: What: 1.
    • Examples
      • S pecific
      • M easurable
      • A chievable
      • R elevant
      • T imely
      • Design & produce circuit boards
      • Design & produce circuit boards that meet customer specifications
      • Design & produce circuit boards that meet customer specifications in an average of 5 work days
      • Do good science
      • Write papers on scientific work
      • Publish one scientific paper this year
      • Publish one scientific paper this year in a refereed journal
      • Answer phones and greet visitors
      • Answer phones and greet visitors in a pleasant and helpful manner
      • Provide accurate information to callers and visitors who request it, delivered in a pleasant and helpful manner
      • Provide accurate information to callers and visitors who request it, delivered in a pleasant and helpful manner, with no more than 1 complaint per quarter
    • Exercise
      • Perform safe and effective maintenance/repair of the CHL, FEL, ESR, CTF, linacs, and SBR as it pertains to electrical, instrumentation and controls. This includes normal workdays and as needed on-call basis. While executing these tasks look for ways to improve the safety and reliability of the cryogenic systems. Work with other members of the group to maintain adequate quantities of spare parts that may be consumed during repairs
      • S pecific? YES
      • M easurable? “safe” and “effective” can be measured; “look for ways” cannot
      • A chievable? YES
      • R elevant? YES
      • T imely? YES; it appears to cover the entire reporting period
      • S pecific
      • M easurable
      • A chievable
      • R elevant
      • T imely
    • Exercise
      • Continue to upgrade and improve the cryogenic targets in Halls A and C and support their operation. Continue to develop new techniques, materials and processes to improve cryogenic and polarized targets, including the frozen spin target
      • S pecific? Somewhat; mentions specific systems, but not how to “upgrade, improve,” “support,” and “develop”
      • M easurable? NO ; how much “upgrade?” what if nothing “new” is developed?
      • A chievable? YES
      • R elevant? probably
      • T imely? YES; it appears to cover the entire reporting period
      • S pecific
      • M easurable
      • A chievable
      • R elevant
      • T imely
    • Exercise
      • Support the Laboratory’s Small Business Program and Affirmative Procurement Programs to achieve all established small business and “green procurement” goals. In this context, closely review requisitions assigned to your group to determine alignment with JLab’s established Small Business, hub zone, and affirmative procurement goals, and actively seek sources that support these goals to the maximum extent possible
      • S pecific? YES
      • M easurable? YES; “achieve all…goals;” seeking “sources that support…goals” can be documented.
      • A chievable? YES
      • R elevant? YES
      • T imely? YES; it appears to cover the entire reporting period
      • S pecific
      • M easurable
      • A chievable
      • R elevant
      • T imely
    • Preparing for the Appraisal
      • Review expectations for reporting period
        • Did anything change?
        • Use existing expectations as baseline
      • Review employee’s professional development
        • Did he/she follow your previous recommendations?
        • What was the result in terms of performance?
        • Were there factors beyond the employee’s control that affected achieving an expectation?
      • Read
        • Employee’s self assessment
        • Work for Others Performance Summary (if appropriate)
      • Understand the scoring and rating standards
        • Form an overall picture of the employee’s performance for the year to compare against the numerical score later
    • Delivering the Appraisal
      • Establish the right environment
        • Quiet, private, no interruptions
        • Give employee a copy of appraisal immediately prior meeting
      • Divide discussion into 2 distinct parts
        • Review of past performance
          • Not a negotiation—more appropriate during self-assessment review
          • Use specific examples
          • All comments must refer to expectation(s)
        • Expectations for the future
          • Does the employee consider the new expectations S.M.A.R.T.?
          • Do you both understand what’s expected?
          • What can you, as a supervisor, do to help?
        • End on a positive note
    • Performance Reviews & Merit/Equity Increase
      • Performance Ratings should be given without consideration of or respect to the amount of money available for merit increases
      • Management needs to accurately assess performance and assign a rating that reflects true performance of each employee
      • Factors for Consideration for merit/equity increase: Current Salary, Market Position and Performance Rating
      • Considerations for Salary Adjustments & Promotions
      • ‘ Achieves’ performance expectations and ‘at market’ = a minimum merit increase
      • Exceeds expectations and ‘at market’ value = moderate merit increase
      • Exceeds performance expectations and ‘below market’ value = high merit increase + equity adjustment
      • Promotion – TRC Process
      Rating Scale Employee Distribution %
    • 2007 Time Line Task Name Start Finish
    • 2007 Time Line (cont.) Task Name Start Finish
    • 2007 Time Line (cont) For technical help with the online process, call Gretchen Kadesch at x 7663 Task Name Start Finish